In June, a "infighting" incident within the Ethereum community sparked widespread discussion. Several core developers publicly accused each other, targeting three key issues: technical direction, fund management, and protocol governance. Long claiming to be "decentralized and collaboratively autonomous," Ethereum is now torn apart by real interests and personnel struggles, raising significant concerns about its governance mechanism and development prospects.
This incident has been referred to by the community as "Ethereum's first political storm," which not only shook the technical community but also quickly affected the market. The price of ETH dropped nearly 6% within 72 hours after the news broke, and several Layer 2 projects were also implicated, leading to increased market panic.
- The Trigger of Infighting: Divergence in Direction or Power Struggle?
The direct cause of this conflict was the question of whether to prioritize the "EIP-7732 proposal" (an optimization proposal to restructure the block production process). EIP-7732 is supported by Vitalik, but some core developers (especially representatives from a certain Layer 2 team) believe the proposal is too complex, has high implementation costs, and concentrates too much power in the hands of validators, which goes against the principle of decentralization.
As the controversy escalated, the involved parties began to broaden the discussion focus:
An anonymous developer posted on Reddit, stating: "The governance of Ethereum development is no longer the ideal of open-source collaboration, but rather a closed-door parliament of technical aristocrats."
- Market Feedback: Price Fluctuations, Trust Volatility, Structural Sell-offs
The outbreak of the EIP route and governance controversy was quickly captured and amplified by the market. Although the incident itself did not affect the stability of the Ethereum network, the following three points are noteworthy:
After the news was released, the price of ETH fell from $3,890 to $3,630, with a daily decline of 6.7%. Although there was a slight recovery afterward, it still did not escape the downward channel. The implied volatility (IV) in the options market increased, indicating that investors' concerns about future uncertainty were rising.
Tokens related to the controversy, Optimism and Arbitrum (OP, ARB), fell by 9.5% and 8.2%, respectively, as the market anticipated that the power struggle between Layer 2 and mainnet development teams would affect the overall ecological synergy.
According to Glassnode data, the number of active wallets on the ETH chain decreased by about 12% in the past 72 hours, as some users may have chosen to adopt a wait-and-see approach to avoid risks, leading to a slight decline in DeFi TVL.
- Governance Mechanism Inquiry: Is the Ideal of Decentralization Confronted with Real Dilemmas?
Ethereum's governance structure has long been regarded as the "closest to decentralization" paradigm in Web3—without a formal board, no central technical committee, and major technical decisions made through the EIP (Ethereum Improvement Proposal) process. However, this infighting has exposed several deep-seated structural contradictions:
Although Vitalik Buterin emphasized that he is "just a proposer," his influence on the direction is undeniable. His direct support for EIP-7732 in this controversy is seen as a "decision bias that bypasses community consensus."
The Ethereum Foundation does not hold administrative power nor directly intervene in governance, yet it controls key funding and resource allocation. The lack of accountability mechanisms has led to external contributors questioning its credibility.
As the developer community expands to multiple global projects and companies, collaboration has shifted from "consensus" to "game theory." Currently, Ethereum lacks effective coordination mechanisms and dispute resolution channels.
This inevitably raises a larger question: Does the ideal of decentralized governance inevitably lead to division or centralization in a complex reality?
- Future Impact: How Will Route Controversies Transform into Market Variables?
The infighting itself does not represent a systemic crisis, but the "governance confidence" fluctuations it triggers may become an important variable for ETH's mid-term trend. We can consider the following perspectives:
In the short term, price adjustments may gradually stabilize, but for institutions and long-term capital, the predictability and stability of the governance structure are key. With the recent approval of the ETH ETF, whether the market's positioning of it as "digital gold 2.0" is shaken is worth noting.
If trust between the mainnet and Layer 2 cannot be rebuilt, it is possible that some Layer 2s will further independent their technical evolution paths, even forming a "quasi-inter-chain competition" state, weakening the integrity of the entire Ethereum ecosystem.
The incident may prompt the community to re-examine the transparency of the governance system, participation mechanisms, and dispute resolution paths. Whether to introduce more on-chain governance and governance tokens in the future will also be an important observation point.
- Conclusion: The Storm May Not Be the End, But the Starting Point for Reconstruction
As the public chain with the second-largest market capitalization after Bitcoin, Ethereum has grown stronger through several upgrades and crises. However, the technology ecosystem driven by idealism must ultimately face the triple test of "human nature, interests, and structure."
The differences within the core team, while temporarily disrupting market sentiment, also provide an opportunity: whether Ethereum can build a more transparent, efficient, and truly diverse governance framework in the new cycle will be a key touchstone for its ability to dominate the future Web3 landscape.
Related: Ethereum (ETH) struggles to break new highs, trend breakout strategy yields over 240%
Original article: “Infighting in Ethereum Core Team Exposed, Collision of Technical Idealism and Real Interests”
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
